When the judges go outside their roles as arbiters and embark on duties of counsels of either of the parties in a case, the people are bound to be concerned.
By Emeka Alex Duru
At moments of crises and uncertainties as Nigeria currently finds itself, it is normal to ask: are there no elders around to put things in order? The question presupposes neutrality or impartiality of the elders on the issues in contention. When however, the elders or umpires descend into the arena or appear to take sides with any of the combatants, loss of faith sets in. And loss of faith in a system, is invitation to danger and anarchy. That is the major problem in Nigeria, right now.
The poor handling of the 2023 general elections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), has caused a great deal of distrust in our electoral system. The judiciary which had been looked upon to put things in order, has equally failed majority of the people by its pronouncements. Both developments are dangerous for the country.
More than any other time, the INEC under Prof Mahmood Yakubu, has reduced electoral contests to a bazaar arrangement in which the highest bidder picks the prize. Nigerians have not been this despondent with the situation. The despair by the candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), in the November 11 Kogi state governorship election, Murtala Ajaka, captures the extent of mistrust Nigerians now place on INEC.
Ajaka, who was on a television programme a day after the election, alleged that the exercise was rigged in favour of his All Progressives Congress (APC) counterpart, Usman Ododo, adding however that he would not be going to court to contest the outcome because doing so would be a waste of time. His reasons: INEC would come as a witness to defend the outcome of the poll. “What am I going to court to do when the same INEC that did this is going to come as a witness to defend what they did? So, it is a waste of time”, Ajaka lamented.
READ ALSO:
BREAKING: 2024 Appropriation Bill passes second reading
That is an open verdict on INEC, a vote of no confidence of sort. Similar ugly remarks trailed the conduct of the poll in Imo. They reflect the opinions of Nigerians on the Yakubu-led INEC, the supposed umpire. In a normal setting, such overt expression of loss of faith on the electoral body, should get the officers and men of the commission thinking. But do we really bother again, here? Do we still have shame? It does not appear so! When concerned Nigerians snigger that our leaders have crossed the threshold of shame and decency in their actions, it is not a matter of joke but one which underscores the absurdity of the situation.
A recall of an encounter between the former governor of Oyo State, Rasheed Ladoja and his erstwhile godfather, Lamidi Adedibu, illustrates an extent the absence of shame has eaten into Nigeria’s politics and public engagements. Adedibu had reportedly asked Ladoja “Can you kill a fellow human being for politics? Can you tell lies to rope in a political foe? Can you swear by the Quran and deny it afterwards?” Ladoja’s answers were in the negative, prompting Adedibu to taunt him that he was not ready for politics, the way it is done here. Politicians in the country can do anything to remain in power. And with a willing accomplice as INEC, as currently constituted, it becomes an easy deal.
The judiciary, another critical institution in strengthening democracy, is not helping matters. It has rather appeared as the biggest obstacle in the democratic process. The assumption before now was that the executive and legislative arms of any country could be partisan on issues but not the judiciary. The judiciary, it was held, should at all-time be neutral and impartial.
Growing up, that picture of the impartiality of the judges, occupied one’s mind for a very long time. Certain developments in my Orlu, Imo State community, reinforced the impression of the transparency of the judges. On occasions when there were matters in the Town and every other effort at restoring peace had failed, it took the intervention of Justice ICK Pats-Acholonu, late Justice of the Supreme Court, for reason to prevail among the contending tendencies. He addressed the issues to the satisfaction of all, without minding whether those involved were related to him or not.
We saw in Justice Acholonu a quintessential judge, in the footsteps of Justices Akunne Chukwudifu Oputa, Kayode Esho and Andrew Obaseki. They were men who rendered justice, believing that in doing so, the heavens would not fall. And indeed, the heavens did not fall! But can we say such about some present occupants of the Bench?
Of course, brilliant judges and other judicial officers still abound at all layers of the sector. But nobody, no matter how patronising, can deny the heavy flood of erosion that has eaten into the confidence of an average Nigerian on the judiciary.
The running impression is that the courts have ceased from being temples of justice to platforms for procurement and extension of favour. This sordid impression has come to gain grounds following controversial rulings on electoral disputes, which led to the sacking of some governors and lawmakers, forcing many to accuse judges of bias. Such assumption does not portend well for the country’s judicial system. But it is only the judges and judicial officers that can correct the impression.
So, when the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, recently argued that public sentiments and emotions cannot replace the law, there was an angle that he did not address.
According to the CJN; “The law remains the law, no matter whose interest is involved. In all we do, as interpreters of the law, we should endeavour to severe the strings of emotion from logic and assumption from fact. We should never be overwhelmed by the actions or loud voices of the mob or crowd and now begin to confuse law with sentiment or something else in deciding our cases”.
The CJN did not get it fully. The judges do not live in the moon. They are members of the society and should not be impervious to the concern by Nigerians. When the judges go outside their roles as arbiters and embark on duties of counsels of either of the parties in a case, the people are bound to be concerned. When there are conflicting judgements and the justices struggle to defend the actions, confidence is eroded. When people who did not stand for primary elections are endorsed by the apex court in the land as candidates, analysts are bound to ask questions. Therefore, the observations by Nigerians on the way the judiciary is going, do not equate to outbursts of a mob. They are matters that deserve attention.
It is good that the CJN admitted that the true touch-stone for measuring the success of a judicial institution is the degree of confidence reposed in it by the public. But outside his chambers and in the midst of genuine friends, it is doubtful if CJN Ariwoola, would muster a sizeable number of Nigerians expressing confidence in the present judiciary he superintends.
